toast_list_low_stock_items

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure, and 'List' reasonably implies a read-only operation with no side effects. However, it does not describe response shape, pagination, authorization needs, or how 'low' is determined beyond the schema's threshold default. This is minimally adequate but not richly transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to the core meaning, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal but leaves gaps: it does not relate to sibling stock/86'd-item tools, explain restaurantGuid, or describe expected results. It supports a no-argument call, but not confident parameterized use or sibling selection.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

One of the two parameters (restaurantGuid) has an empty schema description, and the tool description does not clarify its role. The threshold parameter is documented in the schema, but the description adds little meaning beyond the 'low in stock or out of stock' condition, leaving the agent without full parameter understanding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('items'), and a condition ('low in stock or out of stock'), so an agent can tell what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate from stock-related siblings like toast_get_86d_items or toast_get_stock_item, but the low-stock condition is fairly distinctive.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention alternatives such as toast_get_stock_item or toast_get_86d_items, nor does it explain when the threshold parameter should be supplied. An agent must infer usage context from the tool name and schema.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.